Athiests can be false teachers. They can spread misinformation. I've read some on this forum. Dawkins uses very suspicious, even laugable statistics to support his lectures. The amount of atheists that exist in any given country or profession can be exaggerated, too. This is a problem when you have people trying hard to come to their own, sincere conclusions about whether God exists and they are using these statistics to base their decisions. Misleading information can be spread by both athiests and religionists. When either is spreading false information, they act as false teachers and they are both on the same team, though unwittingly so.
Are religionists and atheists on the same team?
by Fernando 191 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Mr Fool
I find it interesting.
A religionist has a doctrine, a belief that there is A God (or several).
A atheist has a doctrine, a belief that there is NO God.
Both are believers, that´s it.
-
cofty
You have said this same thing dozens of times on dozens of threads.
Dozens of rational people have explained why its nonsense to claim that not believing in god counts as a belief.
You never respond and yet you keep repeating it.
Why?
-
cantleave
Both are believers, that´s it.
So you are a believer in non-unicorns!
-
Mr Fool
Okay, Cofty, you are the wise man. You have a superior insight. I´m wrong as always. No problem. I´m used with people trying to tell me what I shall do/think/behave.
So when someone believes in something (for example the conviction of non existing God), that is not a belief. It´s no problem with me. If you say it´s not a belief, no problem. If someone is convinced that aliens visit (or not visit) us, that is not a belief either. A conviction and a belief have nothing in common. Can be so.....
"Atheism - the doctrine or belief that there is no God"
-
Mr Fool
Non-unicorns, I have not seen any, but who am I to tell if they exist or not? In this world or in other worlds? Even if I have a brilliant logical thinking and so called "proof" I can be dead wrong about everthing I´m certain of. Do I exist? I don´t know. It feels like that, but I´m not 100% sure of it. This text I write can well be an illusion in my mind, I don´t know and I cannot prove it.
-
adamah
A religionist has a doctrine, a belief that there is A God (or several). A atheist has a doctrine, a belief that there is NO God. Both are believers, that´s it.
True, both have their beliefs, but the modern-day theist MUST believe based on FAITH (with no perceivable evidence) whereas the atheist who potentially believes based on CONVICTION (visible evidence).
Granted, there are SOME atheists and theists alike who adopt their stance based on only what they WANT to be true, but neither group deserves much respect, IMO, since the question of Gods existence doesn't hinge on what humans WANT: reality isn't determined based on a popular opinion poll. It just isn't.
Mr fool said-
So when someone believes in something (for example the conviction of non existing God), that is not a belief. It´s no problem with me. If you say it´s not a belief, no problem. If someone is convinced that aliens visit (or not visit) us, that is not a belief either. A conviction and a belief have nothing in common. Can be so.....
Wha? Who said they're not both beliefs? It likely was someone who doesn't understand the definition of 'belief'.
Beliefs are ideas/concepts that we personally accept as true. I believe in gravity, I believe God does not exist, etc. It doesn't mean they ARE true, eg many people cling to delusions or superstitions for which no evidence exists (eg aliens in UFO's). However, those ARE their beliefs, however mistaken or unproven they may be.
Above I explained the difference between BELIEFS that are supported by faith (no evidence) vs convictions (evidence).
Adam
-
Mr Fool
Adamah, Cofty wrote that "it´s nonsens to claim that not believing in God counts as a belief".
I don´t understand this when you can read that "Atheism - the doctrine or belief that there is no God"
Thanks for the deeper explanation (without an aggressive attitude) Adamah
-
adamah
Mr Fool said-
Non-unicorns, I have not seen any, but who am I to tell if they exist or not? In this world or in other worlds? Even if I have a brilliant logical thinking and so called "proof" I can be dead wrong about everthing I´m certain of. Do I exist? I don´t know. It feels like that, but I´m not 100% sure of it. This text I write can well be an illusion in my mind, I don´t know and I cannot prove it.
Science gave up on such time-wasting (although interesting) philosophical discussions centuries ago, since it's ultimately useless to ponder such irresolvable questions (the theological quibbles over how many angels can dance on heads of pins comes to mind) when there are REAL-WORLD problems to be tackled.
The philosophy of science starts from basis pre-suppositions:
1- The world is real (people can agree on what they see)
2- Physical laws influence the real world
3- These laws can be detected by observation and experiment
4- Events of the real world don't disobey physical laws
5- All other factors being equal the simplest explanation is best (Occam's Razor)http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/basic_assumptions
They're presuppositions, since they cannot be proven per se, and while debating them is interesting and ongoing, it's likely just mental masturbation.
Adam
-
adamah
Mr Fool said-
Adamah, Cofty wrote that "it´s nonsens to claim that not believing in God counts as a belief".
I don´t understand this when you can read that "Atheism - the doctrine or belief that there is no God"
Yeah, the nice thing about atheism is that not all atheists have to agree on the very definitions. Presumably Cofty is a rationalist, and can defend his assertions and be swayed via a cogent argument.
The situation is quite unlike theists, since atheists don't believe their ideas are perfect and not to be questioned by claiming a Divinely-inspired source, since we know there is no such thing.
Adam